TEN YOUNG ARTISTS TH EODORON AWARDS Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2012 with funding from Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum Library and Archives http://www.archive.org/details/tenyoungartiststOOsolo TEN YOUNG ARTISTS: TH EODORON AWARDS THE SOLOMON R. GUGGENHEIM MUSEUM, NEW YORK Published by The Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation New York, 1971 All Rights Reserved © The Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation, 1971 Library of Congress Card Catalogue Number 77-1 78872 Printed in the United States of America TRUSTEES The Solomon G. Guggenheim Foundation President Peter 0. Lawson-Johnston H, H. Arnason Eleanor. Countess Castle Stewart Joseph W. Donner Henry Allen Moe A. Chauncey Newlin Mrs. Henry Obre Daniel Catton Rich Albert E.Thiele Michael F. Wettach Carl Zigrosser ARTISTS IN THE EXHIBITION Power Boothe Ron Cooper Billy Bryant Copley Mary Corse Guy Dill Andrew Gerndt Harriet Korman Dona Nelson Michael Singer George Trakas Theodoron is the name of an anonymous founda- tion whose primary interest is to aid young and promising creative individuals. In 1969 a gener- ous grant from Theodoron to The Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation enabled this museum to acquire one work from each of the following artists: Barry Flanagan, Gerhard Richter, John Walker, Gilberto Zorio, Dan Christensen, Bruce Nauman, James Seawright, Richard Serra, and Peter Young. The basis for the selection was an exhibition held here in the same year in which every one of the above-mentioned artists was represented through several examples. The grant, therefore, allowed for the purchase of nine works which, even in the short time that has since passed, have grown markedly in importance in our collection. As a result of this initial experiment Theodoron agreed to repeat the procedure substantially unchanged. The current exhibition selected by Associate Curator Diane Waldman with the aid of Linda Shearer, curatorial assistant, will again enable the Guggenheim to add works both of current interest, and we hope, of lasting value to our permanent holdings. The grant has been in- creased to keep up with rising art prices, although purchases are still restricted to the most modest commercial category. For convenience's sake the talent search was restricted this time to artists residing in the United States, in the hope that concentration upon other areas may be pursued in the future. To assure greater exposure for the selected work, circulation to other American art institutions has been arranged. The Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum is grate- ful to Theodoron for taking the initiative in this project. Through Theodoron, the Guggenheim Museum Collection has been enriched, and an important service has been rendered to artists and public alike. THOMAS M. MESSER, Director The Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum POWER BOOTHE The basic organization of Power Boothe's painting is simplicity itself. The overall canvas, generally divided into two equal vertical parts, is invariably of a 7 x 6' or 6 x 6' format. Each half is then sub- divided into 6, 7, or 8 smaller rectangular parts, again of equal size. In contrast to the rigid compo- sition, however, there is no formula pre-determin- ing whether or not one color covers two or more equal areas, thus creating a look of balanced asymmetry. The one line rarely transgressed is the central vertical line; in this respect Boothe has acknowledged an indebtedness to Mondrian, having seen one of his cubist tree paintings of ca. 191 1 -191 2 in which the trunk implicitly bisected the canvas vertically. Boothe has been able to use the center to activate the canvas, not only as line but as demarcation of area. Since the energy within the painting is directed toward that point, the image seems to exist exclusively around its central axis. Like Kenneth Noland's "target" paintings of concentric rings done in the early 1 960's, Boothe's work expresses an acute sensi- tivity to the center of the canvas and its relation to the framing edge. Where Noland concentrated on a figure/ground relationship through a precisely centered image and a rigorous avoidance of con- tact with the framing edge. Boothe has used the center line as his pivotal point allowing freer play to the edges. In some paintings, the image stops short of the edges, forming an irregular border from the unpainted area and establishing and ex- plicit relationship to the surface plane. But in more recent work he has rejected this approach relying solely on the stability resulting from the center line and the fluctuation of his color to articulate the image. The soft, pastel-like colors are gradated so subtly that it is often difficult to perceive actual distinctions in hue. Consequently, the space threatens to dissolve completely into a deep ex- panse, but color, value and structural dependen- cies counter this tendency; the gradated colored forms hover on the surface, drawing qualities of light and a sense of necessity from their juxta- position. At the same time, however, the all-con- suming mystical intensity which permeates Boothe's work is never denied; it is established by the fragile, almost evanescent capacity of color, line and plane to disassociate almost at the moment of preception. POWER BOOTHE Born in Dallas, Texas, 1945 Lived in Lafayette, California, 1945-1963 Education Attended California College of Arts and Crafts, Oakland, Summers, 1963-1965 Colorado College, Colorado Springs, 1963-1967, B.A. Whitney Fellow, the Whitney Museum of American Art, Independent Study Program, 1967 Group Exhibitions Art Resources Center Gallery (affiliated with the Whitney Museum), New York, Group, January 1968 Art Resources Center Gallery, New York, Group, March 1969 A.M. Sachs Gallery, New York, Group, June22-July 15, 1971 POWER BOOTHE Untitled. 1971. Acrylic on canvas 84 x 72" Collection Richard Foreman, New York RON COOPER Associated with the so-called "Los Angeles school" in his use of new materials and tech- niques, Ron Cooper has extended the limits of painting in yet another direction. He literally builds up a painting out of itself; in this way, he has achieved a near dissolution of the ground and is no longer working with the support as an integral part of the painting. Cooper generally works on a waxed glass sheet which serves as the mold onto which he sprays or rolls multiple layers of dyed polyester resin. After spraying approxi- mately 1 layers on the glass, he then laminates onto the resin a layer of fiberglass cloth, and finally applies another 1 or so layers of resin on top of the cloth, with the resulting sheet measur- ing Vb to 1 A of an inch thick. As Cooper himself has said, he is "working with the closest thing to painting on air." Like air, the translucent surface reflects, re- fracts, and diffuses light; depending on the density of the resin, the light varies, producing coloristic images. Although the basic overall hue depends on his initial choice of colors for the first layers of resin, the resulting effect is atmospheric. The position of the viewer and the external light source also serve to augment and alter this fluidity accordingly. Although Cooper is working with well-explored commercial materials and proc- esses in new ways, he manages to create a painterly and expressive quality reminiscent of Rothko's emotionally charged paintings without succumbing to the finely polished elegance favored by many fellow California artists. He in fact allows for actual variations in the process of applying the resin; the irregularities that occur act as residual elements activating the painting on a highly expressive level. He retains the jagged edges which result from breaking the resin out of the mold and "frames" the paintings with a transparent piece of resin, thereby enabling light to come from behind and illuminate the colors at all levels. The reflected light therefore cannot re- main static or cut off by a traditional type of frame. Because Cooper's work is concerned primarily with light and its multiple properties, he continues to relate light to the form and structure of the painting itself. Instead of a basis in "deductive structure," Cooper's work could more aptly relate to a type of "inductive structure," whereby the structure is the direct result of the painting proc- ess. There is no preconceived structure prior to the existence of the painting. The edges and the frame create shadows on the wall; these edges, frames and shadows are as important to the resulting form as the actual superimposed layers of resin. They function to- gether in much the same way as the elements of a Ryman painting do by revealing the implications to be found in the relation of the painted surface to its support and the wall itself. That Cooper is able to arrive at such subtlety with the use of plastic is unique in itself; it is this ability to transcend the nature of his materials that distinguishes him from other artists working with similar means. RON COOPER Number 97. Black Square. First Level Density. May 1 971 . Polyester resin and fibergJass 86 x 86" RON COOPER Born New York City, 1943 Education Chouinard Art Institute, Los Angeles, California, 1963 One-Man Exhibitions Ace Gallery, Los Angeles, March 1969 Michael Walls Gallery, San Francisco, March 4- 21,1970. Galerie Schmela, Dusseldorf, March 1 0— April 1 , 1970 Pasadena Art Museum, Pasadena, 1970. Group Exhibitions Noah Goldowsky Gallery, New York, Arp to Artschwager, Summer 1967 Hansen Gallery, San Francisco, Plastics X, 1 967 Whitney Museum, New York, 1967 Annual Exhibi- tion of Contemporary Painting, December 1 3- February4, 1967 University Art Gallery, University of California at La Jolla, New Work-West Coast, 1 968 Portland Art Museum, Portland, West Coast Now, March 6-September 22, 1 968. Travelled to Seattle Art Museum, San Francisco Art Museum, Los Angeles Art Museum Institute of Contemporary Art, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Plastics and New Art, January 15-February 25, 1969. Travelled to Marion Koogler McNay Museum, San Antonio, March 16— April 13, 1969 Seth Siegelaub International Exhibition, March 1969, March 1 969. Exhibition organized by Seth Siegelaub, New York Newport Harbor Art Museum, Newport Beach, California, Appearing and Disappearing Image- Object, May6-June28, 1969 West Side Center, Los Angeles, New Directions, 1969 Reese Palley Gallery, San Francisco, Other City, August 11-September 13, 1969 Dusseldorf, Project 69, September 30-October 12,1969 Whitney Museum, New York, 7969 Annual Exhibition of Contemporary Painting, December 17-February9, 1969 Art Institute of Chicago, 69th Annual Exhibition, January 1 7-February 22, 1 970 Douglas Gallery, Vancouver, Group, November 12-November29, 1970 Allen Memorial Art Museum, Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio, 3 Young Americans, April 1 7- May12, 1970 Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago, Permutations: Light and Color, May 1 6-June 28, 1970 Friends of Contemporary Art, Denver, Afterquake, May21-June12, 1971 Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Los Angeles, 24 Young Los Angeles Artists, May 1 1— July 4, 1971 Edmonton Art Gallery, Edmonton, Canada, Alexander-Bell-Cooper-McCracken-Valentine, July 2-July 31, 1971 BILLY BRYANT COPLEY Untitled. 1971. Acrylic on cavas, wire screen 60 x 96" BILLY BRYANT COPLEY The simple device of using a 26x96" screen provides a significant counterpoint in Billy Copley's paintings. If the grid created by the wire mesh does not illuminate the underlying struc- ture of any given painting, it does introduce both pattern and area dividing the surface into three equal units and establishing a regulated all-over configuration. The internal organization of a painting is based on the initial disposition of earth colors (sand, siena, black, brown, copper, blue/brown) worked in a way that suggests a murky kaleidoscopic type of space. The overlaid screen serves therefore to re-establish the planar reality of the image by creating a highly textured surface out of the paint. In one instance (illustrated), Copley decided to leave the screen imbedded in the middle section of the canvas, thus placing an even greater emphasis on the actual tactility of the surface. Curiously enough, this one segment does not read like a three-dimensional object in a Johnsian play on reality vs. illusion, but instead vehemently reinforces the two-dimensional nature of its image. As such, Copley has suc- ceeded in fusing the painterliness of Abstract Expressionism with the concern for materials and process common to many younger artists working in the late 1 960's. He has re-worked the notion of gesture incorporating the fragmentary, the casual, the accidental as a fundamental part of his work, simultaneously objectifying it with the predictably regularized pattern of his screen (paralleling Lichtenstein's usage of Ben Day dots). At the same time, however, he is concerned with the immediate gestalt of his materials and their tactility; the materials them- selves documented the actual painting process as it developed. What distinguishes Copley's work is a sensibility advancing a de-emphasis on art as object. Contrary to the tendencies prevailing in the early 1960's, he is inclined toward a more casual attitude, at the same time developing to a further degree the notion of working out an idea in a series with a certain limited number of elements. Copley's most recent paintings demonstrate the potential to be found in his approach; he has expanded the technique of the screen by introducing hanging vertical panels in a series, each panel measuring 96 x 26", the exact size of one screen. BILLY BRYANT COPLEY Born Los Angeles, California, 1946 Education Chouinard Art Institute, Los Angeles, California, 1964-1965 Group Exhibitions Visual Arts Gallery, The School of Visual Arts, New York, Series Photographs, December 3, 1968-January9, 1969 Paula Cooper Gallery, New York, Drawings, December 1 9, 1 970-January 1 3, 1 971 MARY CORSE Mary Corse's recent paintings (illustrated) evolved naturally from her earlier structures of neon tubing encased in thin, narrow, almost flat plexiglas boxes, which emitted an eerie, tran- scendental light without revealing the specific physical sources or mechanisms from which they were lit. The paintings are comprised of glass beads in acrylic, which reflect or refract light creating a shifting iridescent and rainbow effect which depends on the way in which the paintings are lit and on the viewer's position. In the first series, she paints and controls the place- ment of the glass to organize individual units (usually 16) into a holistic image which is further contained by a narrow border of raw canvas around the edge and keyed by faint color marks in the corner of each canvas. Now the glass paint- ings are a single, more "psychic," image, formed only by the small unpainted angles or squares in the corners, reflecting more precisely a halo and rainbow around the viewer's shadow. It is appar- ent that the interplay between her three-dimen- sional constructions and her light paintings is based on a common interest. Unlike Dan Falvin, who uses fluorescent light to suggest color relationships and light as a sculptural presence and configuration, Corse deals exclusively with advancing a dematerialized "white" or "clear" light. The fact that she has moved from neon to glass indicates the source of her concern: the perception of a singular type of light, to which her form is of necessity sublimated. Her preoccupation with the essence of this experience is based on her awareness of the possibility of moving beyond the tangible properties of the object; it is this awareness which she hopes to expand, and by extension give form to light. The concept of "clear" light has long been in existence, in Tibetan Buddhism, for example: Difficult is it to attain Knowledge of the Formless. Equally difficult is the acquiring of emancipation from karma and rebirth, and the realizing of the Clear Light, bright as the combined radiance of a gem, of lire, of the Moon, and of the Sun. From the Clear Light its kindred lights, shining in the Dark- ness, are born. From them cometh the radiance and warmth of the light of the Sun. From the light of the Sun cometh the light of the Moon; and from the Moon, the embodiment of coolness, cometh the All-pervading Radiance of Wisdom. Thus, the fundamental Voidness, which illuminateth the phenomenal objects of Nature, maketh visible all the World Systems.'' There is a quality of dazzling consciousness to Corse's work which refers to the unspoken and intimate moments of individual experience. Corse's light both generates and is generated by its own energy, hovering between the physical and the immaterial, between perception of natural phenomena and a heightened awareness of other states of being. iBsre-hpho, translated by Lama Kazi Dawa-Samdup. to. 60-I, in Tibetan Yoga and Secret Doctrines, Evans-Wentz, W.Y., editor, Oxford University Press, New York, 1968, p. 167. MARY CORSE Halo with Rainbow Series. 1971. Glass beads in paint 108x 108" MARY CORSE Born Berkeley, California, 1945 Education Attended University of California, Santa Barbara, 1963 Chouinard Art Institute, Los Angeles, California, 1964-1968 Group Exhibitions University of California at Los Angeles Art Galleries, Los Angeles, Electric Art, January 20-March 23, 1 969 Locksley/Shea Gallery, Minneapolis, Young Artists, June 27-July 18, 1970 Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago, Permutations: Light and Color, May 16-June 28, 1970 Joslyn Art Museum, Omaha, Nebraska, Looking West 1970, October 1 8-November 29, 1 970 Whitney Museum of American Art, New York, 1970 Annual Exhibition: Contemporary American Sculpture, December 12, 1 970-February 7, 1971 Los Angeles County Museum of Art, California, 24 Young Los Angeles Artists, May 1 1 -July 4, 1971 GUY DILL Untitled. June 1971. Cement, stainless cable, steel 36 x 96 X 36" Courtesy Irving Blum Gallery, Los Angeles GUY DILL Like the two other sculptors in the exhibition, the physical environment is a crucial determining factor in Guy Dill's work. In the interaction of a work's surroundings with its form and materials, Dill however has largely precluded the obligatory presence of an active spectator who relates both physically and emotionally to the work. Vital to the meaning of his work are the relation- ships he establishes between his materials, the forms they assume and their juxtaposition to wall and floor surface. His earlier work of heavy wooden constructions suspended from the wall has been superceded by work of a more refined nature exhibiting greater tensions. His current work utilizes both the wall and floor in a way that sets up a dynamic interplay of balances and stresses, in contrast to Michael Singer who never exerts strain on his materials. These works hold the surface of the wall by extremely slight means, extending from the wall to the floor in a way that puts intense pressure on the actual materials. Moreover, in several recent works the basic configuration is bow- shaped (illustrated), further emphasizing the tenuous connection between the work, the wall and the floor. The degrees of tactility created by different materials serve to heighten one's awareness of place itself as a specific environment. In spite of his concern for materials, however, Dill is by no means a process artist. Dill, in exploring the objective properties of his materials ratherthan attempting to evoke a poetic association from them, does not allow the on-going process of decomposition or reorganization evident in the work of George Trakas. Rather he establishes from the onset a coordination of parts which in their simplicity serve to delineate a common identity. As such, we perceive in the basic form itself, the terse physical relationship set up between materials— cement beam, stainless cable, steel-and the finite relationship to wall and floor planes. The support of the construction is contingent on three main points of counter- balance where it touches the wall or floor. The area where the work is attached to the wall generates the major portion of tension and balance, while the cement beam functions like an arrow stretched in a taut bow ready to be sprung. This beam has been wedged without the aid of any extraneous support so that the entire piece evolves from its self-perpetuating dynamic energy. In addition, the purely structural energy created by each work is augmented by the interplay of surfaces and textures. In contrast to the work illustrated wherein the cement acts as a foil to the cable and steel, Dill has also worked with single strips of safety glass hung on the wall, as well as with strips of aluminum and glass, also hung. In these examples he reveals the conflicting nature of transparent and solid materials and their relationship to each other. GUY DILL Born Jacksonville, Florida, 1946 Education Chouinard Art Institute, Los Angeles, California, 1967-1970, B.F.A. Exhibitions Friends of Contemporary Art, Denver, Colorado, Afterquake, May 21 -June 12, 1971 Los Angeles County Museum of Art, California, 24 Young Los Angeles Artists, May 1 1— July 4, 1971 ANDREW GERNDT Working out of the relatively recent tradition of monochromatic painting, Andrew Gerndt's paintings are executed almost without exception in grey. Gerndt himself attributes his predilection for grey to its implicit inclusion of both hue and value; he has forced grey to be read as color. The frontal surface is painted absolutely flat without inflection; the completely neutral surface has apparently been abstracted to a final reduction. But because the surface is in fact painted and because Gerndt incorporates varia- tions in panel size, the work provides a vital, as opposed to static, experience for the viewer. Monochrome painting has developed in two basic directions: the intuitive and meditative; the conceptual and structural. Gerndt's work partakes of the latter; he has often employed a repetitive format, as well as changes in scale, and has frequently painted the extreme edges of the support. Therefore, observing one of these canvases, the viewer is not drawn into space, but rather he is confronted by the holistic blank image and then drawn out to the edges and beyond— either to the adjacent panel or to an awareness of the wall itself. But this consequence should not lead one to assume that the painted grey surface is irrelevant to the experience; it is precisely because of the absolute reality of the picture plane that the viewer is capable of an expanded response. With regard to an Untitled painting of 1 970 (illustrated), Gerndt has said: "Numbers interest me because they have the possibility of multiple descriptions of a single structure. In the painting the number one is im- portant because it represents the entire unit. After the number one, five, two and three seem to follow or possibly five, three and two in either order. In this particular painting the numbers jump from a recognizable secondary state, hence the modulation of form above the panels." He painted the top edge of all five canvases with narrow black and white stripes (whose measure is equivalent to that of the spaces between each canvas) at regular intervals; the effect is that of light reflecting onto the wall from the intervals painted white. Whereas the actual scale alters radically between the left two and the right three panels, so that the configuration or image occurs at the edges, the painted top remains the fixed ele- ment in the composition. Rejecting the tendency to intentionally evoke a mystical moment, Gerndt's work compels the viewer to respond to its absolute objectness, while at the same time, the unequivocal greyness suffuses each canvas with light. ANDREW GERNDT Born New York, New York, 1949 Education School of Visual Arts, New York, 1 967-1 971 Exhibitions Visual Arts Gallery, New York, Year-End Student Exhibition, 4th Year Students, May 28-June 4, 1971 UniiVed. 1970. Acrylic on canvas 60 x 276* HARRIET KORMAN Loosely basing much of her work on a grid-like framework, Korman does not concern herself with the now academic issues of cubist derived spatial and formal relationships. Her drawn line or colored bars are a way to approach the canvas, to get from one side to the other, and to make a place for the painting to be, as opposed to where it is not — on the whole surface. She has, in fact, experimented with this very problem, producing several paintings consisting only of a structure of widely spaced painted wooden strips. In many other works the surface which has been marked with colored lines, is covered with gesso which is then scrapped off at regular intervals to reveal the line or stripe lying just beneath the immediate surface. Here the activity in the painting is where there is no paint, or where it has been removed. She has recently started using tape as a way to synthesize the former process, thus allowing for more imaginative manipulation. In one unusual painting, Untitled, of 1969, Korman stitched together three equal rectangular pieces of dyed canvas (one blue, one yellow, one faded red); she then covered the canvas with a thin layer of gesso, after which she exposed five vertical "striped" lines. The lines were each composed of the three colors and served to stabilize the work through a fragile sense of structure. Yet another structural element is evident: two horizontal lines of canvas were formed by sewing together the three pieces, thus creating a very explicit affirmation of the surface, as well as a subtle reformation of the grid system on which she bases many paintings. In contrast to any applied system of color, Korman's sense of color is ultimately intuitive and evocative, being willful and capricious at the same time. Suffice it to say that she uses color in a way which liberates it from strict methodology. In a similar manner, she is not bound to a specific format, as attested to by her most recent paintings. They further demonstrate her preoccupation with the energy activated by the play between painted and unpainted areas. The bars serve as the sur- face of the canvas which can be painted upon; the bars however are no longer strictly bars, but literally have been extended beyond their rigidly vertical contours. HARRIET KORMAN Born Bridgeport, Connecticut, 1947 Has lived in New York since 1 948 Education Queens College, Queens, New York (B.A.), 1965-1969 Attended Skowhegan School of Painting and Sculpture, Maine, Summer 1968 One-man Exhibitions Galerie Ricke, Cologne, Paintings, March 20- April 15, 1970 Galerie Ricke, Cologne, Drawings, July 2- September2, 1971 Group Exhibitions Galerie Ricke, Cologne, Drawings of American Artists, May-September 1970 Kunstmarkt, Cologne, October, 1970 Noah Goldowsky Gallery, New York, Group, May 1971 Galerie Ricke, Cologne, 7 New Works, April 2-April 27, 1971 Sculpture Pier, New York, Brooklyn Festival, May 22, 23, and 24, 1 971 . Sponsored by the Municipal Arts Society. HARRIET KORMAN Untitled. 1971. Acrylic on canvas 72 x 84" DONA NELSON Celery. 1971. Ink and crayon on paper 9x12" DONA NELSON Dona Nelson's paintings and drawings have an affinity with the work of Agnes Martin. Generally basing her work structurally on the static image of a rib or a "T," she utilizes either a symmetrical or an asymmetrical reticulated system to create a single image. Not unlike Boothe, Nelson em- ploys a central axis which divides the canvas (or paper) in half, from which a seemingly uniform pattern is established. Unlike Boothe, however, the architectonic structure forms the basis of her work, employing either or both verticals and hori- zontals. Although the configurations are in fact patently derived from such mundane objects as windows and telephone poles, and refer directly to an architectural foundation, the resulting images are totally non-referential. The segments comprising a painting relate in kind to some of Ellsworth Kelly's chance paintings of the early 1 950's; they alternate between a purely intuitive and a modular systematic type of pictorial construction. Nelson, like Kelly, exhibits a strong feeling for well-proportioned composi- tions, which are, more often than not, highly erratic in the final disposition. Nelson moves across the surface of her canvas, simply filling it up; by using oil paint she can achieve a naturally textured surface. Each mark is equal to all other marks, just as every unit which makes up a wall is equal to the other units The weightiness of the line, the density of the colors, the fragmented tangibility of the surface all project an overall sense of a permanent concrete reality. In addition, by looking at Indian miniatures and relating their particular perception of color to her own work, Nelson's color has become increasingly subtle and more organic in relation to the entire configuration. DONA NELSON Born Grand Island, Nebraska, 1947 Education Ohio State University, 1 965—1 968, B.F.A. Exhibitions The Aldrich Museum of Contemporary Art, Ridgefield, Connecticut, 26 Contemporary Women Artists, April 18-June 13, 1971. Exhibition organized and catalogue introduction by Lucy R. Lippard MICHAEL SINGER Michael Singer is developing a body of sculpture based on principles of balance. To mainlain a stable position in a straightforward manner, Singer has aligned a series of individual units into constructions in which each segment is mutually interdependent on every other one. The work is complicated to a further degree: nearly all his sculptures have the capacity for move- ment; as a result a potential for disorder is imminent since no two poised elements are joined together. Although Singer uses a number of different materials— wood, steel, rattan, etc.— he manipulates them all to conform to a common vision. He imbues a weighty, solid material like steel with properties of flexibility and lightness, thus making it appear no heavier than the rattan, whereas the rattan seems equal in weight to the steel. The act of motion within a single piece necessitates the presence of a participant— a deliberate confrontation, or a mere chance situation in which the piece is touched acci- dentally, for example, by the wind. Although the weight is evenly distributed, any overly forceful action can threaten the controlled state of equili- brium. Singer has been involved in performance and has danced with Yvonne Rainer; it is therefore only natural that his sculpture would include spectator participation. Earlier Robert Morris had introduced this element of participant involve- ment; his preoccupation with theories of dance and performances were related directly to his sculpture. As a result of his experience with performance, Singer's work embodies a strong humanizing quality, not unlike George Trakas': the scale itself is based on the human figure, and it is the human (and conscious) element which proves necessary to activate any given work to its fullest potential as a piece. With the introduction of motion there is a heightened awareness of the nature of the material— as it is and as it is transformed into another context through a transcendence of the medium. For any sculptor, the issue of a "base" presents a major dilemma. The work of David Smith, the first truly radical sculptor to advance this issue, provided the necessary break- through for the next generation. The Minimalist usage of simple geometric units placed directly on the floor incorporated, in the work of Carl Andre, the alignment of particles that re- jected any form of joining. Andre was instru- mental in advancing a new attitude toward sculpture by redirecting the energy originally projected into the actual physical making of an object to a "consciousness" of the unmanipu- lated object as a force existing within a specific environment. For Singer the problem of the base is particularly acute: since the work exists only in a balanced state, each element usually has to be counterbalanced on another element. In order to find a solution, in several instances (including the piece illustrated), he has chosen to use stacked bricks as the supporting form; these bricks are consistent with the total work in their placement since they too are unconnected and simply set one upon the other. They form in effect a springboard for the work without resorting to the traditional conventions of the base. MICHAEL SINGER Balance XXIV. Spring 1971. Wood and lead fire brick 18'x24'x 10" MICHAEL SINGER Born Brooklyn, New York, 1 945 Education Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, 1963-1967, B.F.A. Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, Graduate Study Group Exhibitions Art Resources Center Gallery (affiliated with the Whitney Museum of American Art), New York, Group, March 1969 Hudson Street Loft, New York, Group, April 1970 Hudson River Museum, Yonkers, New York, Light and Movement, December 11,1 970- January3, 1971 Finch Museum of Contemporary Art, New York, Projected Art— Artists at Work, March 13-May 2, 1971 GEORGE TRAKAS GEORGE TRAKAS Untitled. 1971. Glass, rope, ashes, branches, sand bags 67 x 47"; length at base 1 24" As a construction laborer and a builder, George Trakas become preoccupied with basic archi- tectural principles, which he subsequently incor- porated into his sculpture. Multiple associations of his work emanate from one fundamental struc- ture, the roof, of which the most immediate mani- festation is a significant sense of scale related to the human body. While he relies on the rigid symmetry of the roof as his principal framework, he transforms its ordered form into a more pre- cariously balanced and fragmented presence which nevertheless appears to be absolutely cohesive in its totality. Trakas' highly personal usage of accumulated materials has much in common with "process art." He has in fact been involved in a form of "earthworks," and even his latest work is often based on a concern with a natural "process" that takes place over an unspecified period of time. Within this context, Trakas places strong emphasis on the fragmented and conflicting nature of materials— both organic and prefabri- cated, at the same time evoking poetic associa- ions through his sense of juxtaposition. It is in the articulation of his materials that Trakas' work most closely approaches that of Eva Hesse's: her reformulations of Minimalist atti- tudes and Abstract Expressionist sentiments, which she redefined with a new sensibility that fused and expanded both tendencies, have illuminated many subsequent developments in sculpture of the last few years. In several works executed during the past year, Trakas has infused his structures with the element of chance, thereby imposing a threat- ening ambience onto both the work and its immediate surroundings. In one piece, for ex- ample, an interior structure was held in place by one single length of rope, which extended out a window and was anchored to a rock that was wedged in a corner of masonry. The continued existence of the piece relied entirely on the dura- bility of the rope-which was dependent on the weather conditions; the rope responded directly to the amount of moisture in the air by alternately expanding and contracting, until finally during a torrential rainstorm the rope contracted and pulled down the structure. In yet another work, he poured concrete into a trough made of glass, lathe and steel; the glass, unable to endure the stress created by the concrete as it settled, broke neatly in half, allowing the concrete to fall to the floor. In both cases, Trakas foresaw the conse- quences, but could not predetermine the exact amount of time necessary to accomplish the act. In this respect, Trakas elaborated on the Cageian concept of chance to the extent that he con- sciously experimented with a form of premeditated chance. Materials therefore play a crucially important role in Trakas' work not only as elements recording a process, but also fortheir meaning, particularly in relationship to each other. Each material is defined in terms of weight, texture, and plasticity. Glass, for instance, refers to a hard, smooth and cold medium, acting in direct con- trast to the other materials often used by Trakas (rope, branches, ashes, sandbags, etc.). Additionally, glass is both a reflective and a transparent medium, two implied aspects of glass which Trakas does not fail to incorporate as an integral part of his work. Even more significant than the mere juxta- positions are the associations that they imply. In this respect, his materials assume the role of evocative fragments, while the process is also subsumed in a body of imagery asserting itself and being transformed into highly poetic and personal metaphor. GEORGE TRAKAS Born Quebec, Canada, 1944 Education Sir George Williams University, Montreal, 1962-1963 The New School for Social Research, New York, 1963 Hunter College, New York, 1964-1967 Brooklyn Museum Art School, 1 964 — 1 967 Art Students League, New York, 1967 Attended New York University, Institute of Fine Arts, 1967 New York University, B.S., 1967-1969 Group Exhibitions 1 1 2 Greene Street, New York, Group, September-October, 1970 1 1 2 Greene Street, New York, Group, December 1970 Sculpture Pier, New York, Brooklyn Bridge Festival, May 22, 23 and 24, 1 971 . Sponsored by the Municipal Arts Society Museum of Modern Art, New York, Projects: Pier 18, July 1 9-August 2, 1 971 STAFF The Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum Director Administrative Assistant Auditor Secretary Curator Associate Curator Assistant Curator Librarian Coordinators Thomas M. Messer Linda Konheim Agnes R. Connolly Susan L Halper Louise Averill Svendsen Diane Waldman Margit Rowell Mary Joan Hall Linda Shearer Carol Fuerstein Conservator Assistant Conservator Preparator Photographers Registrar Coordinator Orrin Riley Lucy Belloli Saul Fuerstein Robert E. Mates Paul Katz Roger Anthony Dana Cranmer Olticer, Public Altairs Publicity Membership Secretary Book Store Supervisor Intormation Coordinator Superintendent Assistant Superintendent Head Guard Coordinator Robin M. Green Anne M. Grausam Miriam Emden Cheryl Wells Darne Hammer Carolyn Porcelli Peter G. Loggin Guy Fletcher, Jr. Charles F. Banach Yolanda Bako PHOTOGRAPHIC CREDITS All photographs by Robert E. Mates and Paul Katz, with the exception of: Ron Cooper: Dan Zimbaldi Mary Corse: Eason Design Guy Dill: Patrick Coffman Michael Singer: Photographed by the artist George Trakas: Photographed by the artist 2,500 copies of this catalogue designed by Malcolm Grear, type set by Craftsman Type Inc., have been printed by Meriden Gravure, in September, 1971, for the Trustees of the Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation on the occasion of the exhibition, "Ten Young Artists: Theodoron Awards."